The sensor is way better than every other in the market.
The dynamic in low light and high sensitivity is outstanding, and the noise is never an issue.
It's less prone to collect dirty than the D700.

The ergonomy is sightly better than in the D700, and the noise while shooting is (unfortunately) about the same. The "quiet" feature doesn't help, only slow down the camera.
I like very much the "new" disposition of some commands, like the AF dial.

The general features are a great improvement, with the AutoISO finally useful as well as some other features (the double virtual horizon, 1.2X crop...).

The real issue is still the AF point distribution, covering no more than the DX format, but when well tuned the AF is very fast and precise (one of the two D800 I have needed a fine tuning at Nikon service, done under warranty).

The camera is rather slow, and needs a couple of fast card because of the big RAW files, but it's something one must know before purchase the D800.

What is really too much underestimate around the web, in my opinion, is the risk of blurred images due to the extremely high definition.
Forget the "easyness" of the D3/D700: this camera is hyper definited... and every minimal movement during the exposition is never forgiven.

But after few time of use, I find the D800 the perfect replacement for the D700 on street photography.
...And even better, looking at the low light rendition.

I never use the video feature, neither the Live View or the JPG on camera, so I have no opinion about that.

My lenses range from some old AFD (105/2DC, 20/2.8, 16/2.8 FishEye) to some newer G lenses (24-70G, 50/1.4G, Sigma 150/2.8), and I haven't seen any defect on top of what was with every other camera.
The extra definition doesn't degrade any lens performance.

I absolutely don't reccommend this camera to everybody.
Only who know very well how to use such a great definition (and own the better lenses in the market at least for the most used focals...) should purchase this camera.
For all the others the D700 is still a great camera, the D600 is better than expected (I own one D800 and one D600, now), and the D800 is only a waste of SD and CF cards.

The only reason i made the switch from Canon. Well, that and the 14-24.

Being a landscape photographer, dynamic range and fine detail is crucial to me, and the D800 excels at those.

My only gripe is the still poor live view performance, which is very annoying when trying to achieve precise focus, but you learn to live with that.

Other issue, although not as dramatic, is the green cast of the rear LCD. it's really hard to get a feeling of what the final image will look like when in the field

I see people whine about large files and the camera being less forgiving to mistakes, well this is not a camera for people who don't know what they are doing. know its limitations and treat it with respect, and you will get the best image quality a 35mm sensor can offer today.

Dec 26, 2013

eduardvdkOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 9, 2013Location: NetherlandsPosts: 0

Review Date: Jul 15, 2013

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,800.00
| Rating: 8

Pros:

What I love about this camera is the basically the 36MP and the huge dynamic range.

Cons:

The menu structure isnt that logical in my eyes and the Low noise ISO could be a little higher to my liking.

This camera is doing all my heavy duty in the field (wedding photographer). It works awesome havind this dynamic range and amount of pixels. Although when it comes to low light situation it could have a little better Low noise ISO. I did post some examples on http://www.bruidsfotograaf.nl/trouwfotograaf.

The screen/buttons are good, but maybe thats because I'm used to it. I would definetley recommend this camera.

An excellent camera. I've owned both nikon and canon both are excellent. the IQ from this camera is superb. the dynamic range of this camera is just ridiculous. the detail you get from these files rivals some medium format.

Apr 29, 2013

asamimasaOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 28, 2010Location: United StatesPosts: 201

Review Date: Jan 23, 2013

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Dynamic range in the shadows (not so much the highlights).
Resolution and detail within it
Scratches my itch for medium format resolution without the price
Dual card slots immensely useful
Sweeping viewfinder
AF performance (picked up a D800 right after owning a D3)

Amazing dynamic range, handles high ISO very well & great video quality

Cons:

Audio quality

Mostly I use D800 to shoot wedding videos. Great camera for the price. I get awesome low light performance. I mount the camera on Steadycam and Slider and been using it for past 8 months and it still works great.

Only issue I have with this camera is audio quality of internal microphone but it is a negative aspect since DSLR audio not suppose to be as good as external recorder anyway.

I demo'd the d800 and the 5dIII for one week, eventually settling for the latter. My thoughts after using shooting 500 pics on the d800 over the course of a week:

Image quality is excellent in the right situation. At base ISO, there is nothing on the market that touches it when taking pics of static images or landscapes. I have not been so lucky with anything that moves. This is most prominent at wide open apertures (I primarily shoot primes lately). Shooting both single shot and continuous, I had a greater number of poorly focused shots. This was simply not an issue with the 5dIII. The d800 AF module is excellent, in general, but I wonder if it needs to updated for the demands of this sensor.

High ISO quality is very good. Dynamic range is excellent in RAW. Color is off - skin tones are just not where I like them to be. It takes work in PP to rectify this, but I greatly prefer the 5dIII or, interestingly enough, the d600. Both of those cameras have natural skin tone with rich color. The d800 is generally flatter with a slight green cast. Custom white balance set points do help a little.

Build quality is a disappointment. I have a high standard for Nikons - the d700 was a luxurious feeling camera, for instance, but the d800 grip is bad. Thin, with no thumb hook and plasticky feeling due to the CF door. The 5DIII just feels richer, more solid with a far better grip.

If I shot landscapes, studio or other tripod work, I'd go with the d800. I don't shoot landscape and primarily shoot handheld in available light, so I went with the Canon. These are actually very different cameras in use, so it's mostly a matter of what your style and subject matter is, rather than the inherent qualities of these bodies - both are excellent.

Oct 28, 2012

NikonGuy221OfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 22, 2012Location: United StatesPosts: 65

Review Date: Aug 13, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,000.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Great auto-ISO feature
Low light performance
AF in low light

Cons:

Slow FPS
No integrated battery grip

've had the D800 for a while now and have had the chance to shoot with it in less than ideal lighting - mostly between 6 and 7am when bird activity is at it's highest. One thing that has constantly surprised me is the great high ISO capability of this camera as I bought it resigning myself to dealing with significant noise. After a couple of months of shooting, I find myself comfortably shooting into the ISO 3,200 range when the light calls for it, and switching to my D3S only beyond that. The next question to me was - how does it compare against the venerable D3S that was until recently (and some say still) the king of low light / high ISO shooting?

My test included shooting both cameras in controlled lighting (the light from a single incandescent bulb) and set up on a tripod. All images were taken with the Nikon 16-35mm f/4 lens with VR switched off. The pictures were shot in RAW, viewed side by side in Adobe Lightroom 4 at 1:1 ratio (hence the much larger images from the D800), and a screen capture was taken.

Please note that this test is ONLY intended to show noise and not resolution - from looking at the samples I can see that the D800 was outresolving the printing capabilites of this seed manufacturer (the subject is a packet of seeds)!

AF better (faster) than, and high ISO almost as good as D3, 15 megapixel crop mode, smaller package than D1/2/3 bodies, video and 36 megapixel as a bonus

Cons:

Ridiculously expensive grip (and D4 battery if you you want that option to go with it, body not as 'brick'proof as D1/2/3

Shooting sports (surf) and fashion (castwalk) the D3 was (and is) for many years my body of choice.

Problem was that for surf, I lost the reach of the 200-400mm/D2X/HSC mode combi I used to work with, and in the D3 FX mode had to use a 4/600 with 1.4 TC. Still got lovely pictures, but had to drag along a lot more (heavier) equipment.

With catwalk on the other hand, my 2.8/80-200mm was too short for the bigger venues, and although the 4.0/200-400 was an excellent alternative, I missed the one extra stop.

I had been thinking of a D3X for the bigger files in DX crop mode, but the price and compared to 'normal' D3 limited high IS0 gave me second thoughts. ( the difference in high ISO between D3 and D3s compared to the real need for the times I really needed that did not justify the cost of an upgrade for me.

Finally, I have lugged around an extra D3 body for back up with me, but never really needed it, while having the same specs as the other D3, it offered no new/aternative options to look out for.

Enter the D800.

My first interest was the 15 megapixel DX crop (the 5 megapixel crop of the D3 never interested me), while I hoped the AF and high ISO would be near or on par with the D3. Fortunately all the above answered my expextations.

My only problem was that my copy of the D800 came with serious back focus problems, but a trip to Nikon had that solved (for free of course)

The grip of course also is a bit of a bump at the official price, but found an original one at 25% less, and discovered I have the same fps with Eneloops (of which I have a bundle lying around) as with the D4 battery. Even when shooting surf I never go faster than 7 fps, so I can live with the 6 fps in X mode.

Did het some 16 gig CF cards, and some SD cards, but no real major expenses in that regard.

Only lens that really fell short for use with the D800 was my venerable old 2.8/80-200 AF D, which given it's age was no surprise, and quite honestly already in title for an upgrade for some time already. So it recently got replaced with a 2.8/70-200 VR2

Use the D800 much in crop mode, can use the 200-400 with TC for surf again, and for catwalk the virtual 120-300 is just what I was looking for.

As a bonus I have the 36 megapixel option for studio/catalog work, and video for whenever I may be needing it (have no experience with video so far though)

And I get all the above, in familiar Nikon quality, at the remarkable (relative) low price point, so I'm a happy trooper

1) Frame rate is low at 4 fps; no option to increase frame rate even with low quality..this is stupid.
2) Grip is ridiculously expensive

If you can find one and can spare the cash, you will be very happy!

This is no doubt the BEST camera I have ever used. This includes a long line of film bodies from Canon and Nikon, as well as Pentax 645 medium format and Canon's pro digital bodies.

The optical quality is so good that it seems impossible to make mistakes, particularly if you shoot RAW. The downside is that you can fill up your hard drive very quickly (with 40MB + file sizes for a single image), and you quickly learn to be more discerning. I have shot almost 5000 images since I got this body just 2 months ago!

Ergonomics is quite similar to the D700 body, which I absolutely loved. After years of shooting with Canon bodies, I made the switch because of the D700 body and it ergonomics (as recommended by no less an expert than Scott Kelby). In my opinion, these are the two greatest camera bodies ever produced (under $ 3000). Yes, I am including the venerable Canon 5D M2 in that list (optically wonderful, but not a pleasure to use)

From a value stand-point, I believe the D800 is a competition crusher, there is nothing even close with this quality of resolution (full frame 35 MP!!!) at this price-point. You can pay 10 times this price for Phase One medium format digital bodies ...etc!!!

The files are smooth, with buttery transitions between shadows and highlights. Colors are vibrant, your images literally jump off the page.

Unfortunately, the LCD display does not seem any better than the D700 (adequate, but difficult to view in bright sunlight). Also, the display does not articulate, it would have been a really useful feature and I would have gladly paid a little extra fro that benefit.

I have not commented on HD video (very good, if used properly with a tripod etc) as I am not a heavy video user and don't feel qualified to comment. It is perfectly usable (for those who are interested in pursuing this option).

Obviously this is not meant to be a technical review, this review is just my opinion. It is meant to help those who have not used this body and need some motivation to check it out!

For the benefit of those who want to see many sample images, I have created a D800 sub-gallery on my website, under the main gallery called Portfolio. Please know that all my images are copy-right protected and that you should NOT try to download.

Shadow detail has to be seen to be believed. Features galore. Responsive. Glorious dynamic range.

Cons:

ISO button still difficult to hit while shooting...that's all I can think of.

I sold my 5DMkII last year in anticipation of the MkIII. I then stumbled upon this beast, and it's very, very nice. The MkIII pricing I felt was just wrong, and the spec (beyond the AF) was kind of disappointing...still a great camera, but I think the value here has now tipped in Nikon's favor at least for me.

Detail of course is amazing, it is almost impossible to blow highlights, the metering is spectacular. But I am able to push shadows 2 stops with virtually no increase in noise and amazing detail - something one could not do on the MkII and evidently not the MkIII either. Very cool.

So I guess I am a Nikon guy now...but either are really great tools.

Jun 3, 2012

OskarOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 16, 2012Location: AustraliaPosts: 0

Review Date: Jun 1, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

The D800 is one great camera, and have produced my first 2 pro jobs on it, being use to shooting large files ie Phase One , i did not expect the ease and speed of this camera , it is beyond belief for the money lucky i do have all Nikon lens i must admit i purchased it as a back up for my other 2 Nikons , but now this is the main camera i will use, it does look like a cheep camera and had a client comment saying just that, but add the extra battery and vertical mount it now looks the part , you will need a big computer and back up system in place to handle the files, the images are just fantastic . it is light weight as basic unit , great for discrete non attention street shooting then just bolt on the extra battery unit if you want .

Cons:

Looks like a cheep camera, you will need power plus computer and back up system in place , should have 2 CF card slots and not 1 plus the CF secondary

Jun 1, 2012

David MillsOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: May 4, 2012Location: United KingdomPosts: 7

Review Date: May 5, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Quality, I was thinking about medium Format, not any more. Add the video as a bonus and the fact that I can use my old DX lenses with superb quality, what is there not to like?

Cons:

Not found any so far other than what to do with the £9000 pounds I saved on the Hassleblad + lenses.

Not enough time so far to explore all the possibilities. Used it as a Video backup at a recent wedding where I was the Videographer, stunning quality although takes some getting used to as a video camera. I never expected to be converted so easily to a DSLR for video, but there we are. I am about to sell some seriously bulky Canon HD Video equipment and travel light when doing video in future.
Worried that the resolution might show up lens shortcomings, but seen no obvious evidence so far. I do print to A2 and the file size is a major boon. I have added a D4 and held onto my D3s but see the D800 as my new "travel" companion. I loved my D700, but I'm afraid there is a new girl in town. It may be imagination but you can almost see the quality on the rear screen. I don't know if anything can be 10 out of 10 but it certainly seems that way.

May 5, 2012

RRRogerOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 10, 2004Location: United StatesPosts: 1355

Review Date: May 3, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $3,000.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Awesome Landscape Detail
Lots of controls
Fast enough for Action Photography
Compatible with all my Nikkors
Great Pictures even with less than best lens
even though better glass gives you better images on any camera.
Handles high ISO very well

Cons:

Huge learning curve for me because there are so many settings options.
Not harder to hand hold than a D7000, you need to increase your shutter speed a little more and hold very steady.
I've been using the D800 for a month now for Landscapes, Videos, and Event Photography.

It doesn't have custom modes like U1&U2 like in D7000. FPS could be faster. Nikon doesn't have enough good lenses for it.

I have had D40, D200, D90 and D7000 before this. I do mostly nature photographing. Landscapes and birds mostly.

Mostly I changed because of the bigger VF and ergonomics. With glasses this camera is much better to use than my previous cameras.
AF is excelent. With Sigma 120-300 OS, I could hit and track BIF in so dark that I couldn't spot them with naked eye.
It's a really much better than highly regarded AF in D7000.

Dynamic range is amazing. D7000 had a good DR, but this is even better!

5:4 aspect ratio has began my favourite with this camera. It still has >30mp for it.

My biggest complaint is that Nikon doesn't have lot of really good lenses to choose from which can take most of that amazing sensor.